Citation Nr: 0715878
Decision Date: 05/29/07 Archive Date: 06/11/07
DOCKET NO. 06-01 680 ) DATE
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Manchester,
New Hampshire
THE ISSUES
1. Entitlement to service connection for tinnitus.
2. Entitlement to service connection for probable Meniere's
syndrome with impaired hearing.
3. Entitlement to service connection for diabetes with
secondary ataxia, loss of visual acuity, neuropathy, and
kidney failure.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: New Hampshire State Veterans
Council
WITNESS AT HEARING ON APPEAL
The veteran
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
S. A. Mishalanie, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
on appeal from a December 2004 rating decision issued by the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in
Manchester, New Hampshire. In October 2005, the veteran
testified at a hearing at the RO before a decision review
officer (DRO). A transcript of the proceeding is of record.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The veteran in this case served on active duty from
August 1957 to April 1960.
2. In April 2007, the RO received a copy of a death
certificate, which indicates he died in March 2007.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
Because of the death of the veteran, the Board has no
jurisdiction to adjudicate the merits of the claim. 38
U.S.C.A. § 7104(a) (West 2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2006).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
It has been brought to the attention of the Board that,
unfortunately, the appellant died during the pendency of the
appeal. As a matter of law, appellants' claims do not
survive their deaths. Zevalkink v. Brown, 102 F. 3d 1236,
1243-44 (Fed. Cir. 1996); Smith v. Brown, 10 Vet. App. 330,
333-34 (1997); Landicho v. Brown, 7 Vet. App. 42, 47 (1994);
cf. Padgett v. Nicholson, 473 F. 3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2007)
(upholding Zevalkink and Landicho as they apply to non-final
VA decisions). This appeal on the merits has become moot by
virtue of the death of the appellant and must be dismissed
for lack of jurisdiction. See 38 U.S.C.A. § 7104(a) (West
2002); 38 C.F.R. § 20.1302 (2006).
In reaching this determination, the Board intimates no
opinion as to the merits of this appeal or to any derivative
claim brought by a survivor of the veteran.
38 C.F.R. § 20.1106 (2006).
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed.
Mark D. Hindin
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals
Department of Veterans Affairs